All posts by ester

A Jewish Studies Wedding

Gorka! Gorka!” the crowd shouted.

And, in a manner that called to mind my ten-year-old self when first I played Spin the Bottle, the bride and groom leaned into each other and kissed.

Gorka! Gorka!” the crowd continued to chant, as insatiable as only drunk crowds can be, egging on each other and the newly-married couple. Russian relatives began to count, making it to ten (dyecyat’!) and then fifteen (pyat’nadyecyat’!) before the couple broke apart to breathe and the crowd erupted in applause.

This tradition is the Slavic equivalent, apparently, of the groom removing the bride’s garter. I have never seen that done — the weddings I’m invited to are generally high-brow affairs, full of literary pomp and godly circumstance. But I have heard garter removal is a thing, like bouquet tossing (does that too happen in real life, or only in movies?).

My old friend L., with whom I recently reconnected, married her long-term boyfriend S. this past weekend in Somerville, Massachusetts, and even by the unconventional standards of my friends’ nuptials, their celebration was unique. Instead of a rabbi, they tapped a friend of theirs, an earnest, bearded, young PhD candidate, to officiate; instead of a cantor, they asked another friend of theirs, also earnest and scholastic but much taller, to chant. No conventional authority figure at all, in fact, was there to solemnize the union. Instead, the bride and groom — both serious students themselves — canonized Academia itself. With help from Rachel Adler’s Engendering Judaism and several other texts, the couple redesigned the ceremony to fit their principles, explaining as they went the significance of each amended ritual.

I’ve been to Jewish weddings before, of course, but this was my first Jewish Studies wedding. The professors in the audience looked very proud.

It was also the most Russian of any wedding I’ve ever been to, since the groom is himself an immigrant. There were vodka shots (served with pickles) and, in lieu of an American-style wedding cake, a proud Russian aunt’s home-made “Napoleon,” the product of two weeks of work. It was, appropriately, large enough to serve an army.

“Could you eat the entire thing?” my table-mate whispered to me. “If you had to? If the lives of your family members were at stake?”

This table-mate, R., had been seated next to me by chance. I introduced myself; she stared at me with such intense focus I half-expected her to kiss me on the mouth. Instead she asked, “Did you live off Oregon Avenue?”

“Uh,” I replied. “Yes?”

“I know you!” she said. “We used to ride the bus together! Oh my god. Oh my god. I know you. This is too strange. We were really good friends.”

I looked at her, trying to remember her (remembering is one of the things I’m usually good at). She beamed while I flailed.

“This is so embarrassing,” she said, “but I …  well, I was four years older than you, and you were my little friend. We sat together on the bus! Until, well, one day … I hit you.”

Hit me? Why?

“I don’t know! I think it was some sort of power thing! It was totally unprovoked.” Her mouth twisted with the pain of the memory. “You were so small! And your hair was red?”

“It’s still auburn,” I said defensively. “Especially in the sunlight.”

She looked unconvinced but went on. “Anyway, it was terrible! I hit you! Then you told your mom, who called my mom, and I got in trouble. We weren’t friends after that. And then I switched schools. But oh my god, I can’t believe I get a chance to apologize. I’m so sorry!”

Nothing about this sounded familiar. Yes, I rode the bus, I lived off Oregon Avenue, and yes, I was small with redder hair. But if I had been hit — for no reason, by a girl four years older than myself — surely that would have left an emotional mark?

Her eyes pleaded with me and I did the only reasonable thing. “It’s totally okay,” I said. “I forgive you.”

“Really?” she said.

“Yes,” I said. “You’re absolved.”

“I can’t wait to tell my mother!” she said. “I’m going to text her right now.”

Gorka! Gorka!” cried the crowd. It seemed like the increasingly raucous guests were not going to be happy until the bride and groom actually did it on the floor in front of everyone and managed to conceive a child.

“Russians,” I said to Mr. Ben, shaking my head. He grinned at me. Then the Klezmer band started up, leading the guests in a parade across the street, back to the bride-and-groom’s apartment courtyard, where we danced until we could dance no more, and Rachel Adler had nothing whatever to say about it.

The Right Relationship for the End Times

Last night, after Mr. Ben and I finished playing Dance Central and got into bed, I started thinking about all the things I appreciate about our relationship. (Like our video game system! No, just kidding. I mean real, substantive things.) Like …

We’re On the Same Page

When one of the various alarms in our apartment goes off at night, we have the mutual reaction: “Let’s take the batteries out and hope we don’t die in our sleep.”

We Speak The Same Language

Which is a bizarro, unintelligible one. A good portion of our daily conversation is made up of quotes from Clueless and Pulp Fiction. I’d hazard a guess that it is vital that if you go into an impromptu Massacre Theatre routine, your partner laughs rather than assumes you have gone cray-cray.

We Share Values

Like enjoying life in Brooklyn, and Tina Fey and Eddie Izzard and Margaret Cho, and gardens, and movies that are so funny they make you cry (in my case, at least).

Like the importance of both cooking and “cooking.”

Like religious observance. We’re both Jews, so neither of us is Rapture-ready for the morrow or, failing that, for when Jesus comes back in 2012.

We’re both skeptical of religion in general ways, yet we go together to shul on Saturday mornings. In fact, my actually-Rapture-ready friend Tara Leigh is coming with us tomorrow! As she mentioned on Twitter:

Right.

The point is, if the world ends tomorrow or next year, I’m glad I will be hand in hand with a really good guy who agrees that washing glasses really isn’t so necessary when it’s just the two of us drinking water from them most of the time.

Reading Papa on Trains

My new thing: Inadvertently picking up boys by reading Hemingway in a public place.

SCENE: Uptown 1 train during rush hour

CHARACTERS: A whole train full of them, leaving only scattered seats available for our heroine, ESTER, who carries a purse, a tote bag, and a paperback copy of The Sun Also Rises. She navigates her way towards an empty spot next to a young white male HIPSTER, with unwashed hair and metal stuff in his face, who is sprawled casually across several seats. His feet rest against the pole.

HIPSTER: That’s a good book.

ESTER: [smiles politely, like she always does when strange men speak to her uninvited.]

HIPSTER: [louder] That’s a good book!

ESTER: Uh huh! [unspoken: Actually, I’m finding it pretty boring, but I’d like to keep reading, so if you –]

HIPSTER: I love Hemingway. He’s so great.

ESTER: Yeah! Well, except, his voice does seem pretty similar book to book. I just read A Moveable Feast and —

HIPSTER: A Moveable what?

ESTER: Uh, A Moveable Feast.

HIPSTER: I don’t know it.

ESTER: It’s his memoir of life in Paris. You should read it — it has F. Scott Fitzgerald in it.*

HIPSTER: [blank stare]

ESTER: Anyway, it strikes me as funny that the narrator there is essentially exactly the same as the narrator in this one — and this one’s supposed to be fiction.

HIPSTER: But that’s the thing! It’s all HIM. It’s so real.

The man himself

ESTER: Sure! And he seems so happy, drinking, living in Europe, meeting women …

[HIPSTER smiles suggestively. He is good-looking, although not as good-looking as he thinks he is, and his feet are still on the pole. He is taking up enough space for at least three people.]

HIPSTER: Yeah. He had the life!

ESTER: Yeah! The details are so strange, though. He’s totally into cataloging exactly what he ate, what he drank, and then the streets he took to get home to his apartment in Paris, but then his wife has a baby and you don’t hear anything about that til the kid is 6 weeks old. I guess it’s no surprise he got divorced. … And then he killed himself.

HIPSTER: Yeah! What’s up with that? Isn’t that weird?

ESTER: Seriously. To go all around the world, sleep with everyone, be a writer, eat and drink and have a great time, and then blow your head off in Idaho. … Here’s my stop! Have a nice day.

 

* The best part of that entire book is a conversation between F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway in a cafe where Fitzgerald confesses that Zelda told him his penis is too small to give a woman pleasure and he is now terminally insecure about it. Hemingway takes him into the bathroom to see, tells him it’s fine, and then takes him to the Louvre to look at naked statues. Even that doesn’t alleviate poor Fitzgerald’s concern. But you have to admit, Papa was a good friend.

The Great European Cities Tour of America

My very first Hairpin piece is up! Check it out: The  Great European Cities Tour of America.

“It is a fact both true and sad that Europe, while awesome and filled with classy old buildings, is expensive. A boyfriend  backpacking there after the decline of the dollar told me he missed fruit, which cost too much, and made the wistful  request that I eat grapes for him. He also gave up shaving rather than shell out for razors.

But unsightly facial hair and scurvy need not be the prices you pay for travel! Not if you do it right. …”

Go read it! Then come back for a meta-discussion.

For the Berlin section, editrix extraordinaire Edith Zimmerman and I went back and forth about what a funny motto for  Berlin would be. I suggested, “The city where the sweet old man feeding pigeons in the park may have turned your Nana  into a lampshade!” She pointed out, politely, that that was a bit of a shift in tone from the rest of the piece.

After much deliberation & brainstorming, I presented her with the following less macabre alternatives:

* “BERLIN: The city that runs on Spaetzle.”

* “BERLIN: The city where even six-year-olds are cooler than you.”

* “BERLIN: Where even Hitler fell in love.”

* “BERLIN: Where they are really, really sorry about that thing that happened.”

Which one do you like best? Can you suggest something better? Edith went with “spaetzle,” which WordPress spell-check does not recognize as a word, btw. But I have eaten it at the Neue Gallerie’s restaurant and I have learned it is for real. It is real inside you for DAYS.

 

ETA: This has now been cross-posted on the Awl. Wow. The day a girl comes across herself on Google reader is a happy day indeed.

Bad Motherfucka

“Go in that bag and find my wallet. It’s the one that says ‘Bad Muthafucka’ on it.”

Pulp Fiction

From whiplash (Osama’s dead!) to backlash (How dare you celebrate?), I counted about 30 seconds. It’s a bit exhausting. Sure, the jingoistic “America, fuck yeah!” nonsense is annoying, but so is people being pious about how all murder is always bad. I’m a vegetarian who doesn’t support the death penalty. That doesn’t mean I’m going to pause and mourn the end of a killer.

Maybe I’ve just been watching too many action movies, or maybe it’s all the Game of Thrones I’ve been reading (I’m on Book 3 and I’ve counted about 2,300 corpses and 657 rapes). Maybe I’m desensitized.  Or maybe, as the Onion puts it:

I’m going to devote my energy to wondering how this will affect Barry O, newly President Bad Motherfucka.

Blue state boyfriend Nate Silver addresses the issue here.

Seems to me it helps Obama that Osama wasn’t captured and brought to trial: that helps him break out of the detached intellectual stereotype. I mean, even Rush Limbaugh took five seconds off today from his usual habit offending all decent people to say, “Thank God for President Obama.”

This makes me think I’m not alone in admiring the way Obama made this happen. There was good intelligence and more good intelligence; there was thinking and planning and THEN targeted, specific, successful action. If our wars had been considered along those lines, they would be going a hell of a lot better than they are now — or, even better, they would never have been embarked on at all.

My brother points out that, in an ideal world, perhaps this raid would have happened in October 2012. You know Karl Rove would have arranged that if he could. But one can’t have everything.

{Hilarious gifs and images compiled by the folks at Ranker.}

The Southern Legal Resource Center

When Mr. Ben and I were in Asheville, we took a detour to the quaint town of Black Mountain, which sounds like a cursed kingdom straight out of Game of Thrones but was in actuality sunny and pleasant, with studios for both yoga and pilates, and lots of inoffensive artists.

The town’s Tomahawk Lake was also much more suburban-seeming than it sounds. (How about some truth in advertising, North Carolina?)

We were headed down Church Street to Main Street for some window shopping when I noticed a shingle outside a building. “Look, Mr. Ben!” said I. “It’s the Southern Legal Resource Center!”

“Aw, great!” he said. For a few days by that point, we had been enjoying the area’s 75 degree weather, blue sky, green grass, clean air, and slutty trees, busting out with flowers. We began to envision, in unison, a life in which we lived in some adorable Asheville bungalow — hopefully next to the creative folks who decorate their yards like so:

Mr. Ben would ply his attorney’s trade as a partner at the Southern Legal Resource Center, no doubt defending low-income, persecuted defendants, like those represented by the Southern Poverty Law Center and the ACLU. I’d write. We’d grow vegetables in our yard, and raise some of the wild-and-free, life-lovin’, plump, glossy chickens we saw people raising, and hang out in the anarchist cooperative bookstore-event-space-and-vegan-cafe in town, and play Dance Central, skee ball, and Tetris at Arcade, and drink $8 flights of artisinal beer at the Thirsty Monk, and generally have a grand old time.

Stars firmly in place in our eyes, we walked up the stairs to meet Mr. Ben’s future partner. Why not? It was a Monday; odds are he’d be hard at work defending the depressed and dejected. Indeed, there he was in his adorable old-timey office under a ceiling fan, a stout, older white gentleman with a handlebar mustache.

He greeted us effusively, shook hands, and began describing his practice. Turns out we weren’t too far off in our guesses of what he did: his focus was in First Amendment law.

Specifically, the First Amendment right to display the Confederate Flag.

Our jaws dropped, and before we could reach down and dust them off, he had asked us cheerfully where we were from.

“New York,” we chorused.

Where specifically?

“Brooklyn Heights.”

Ah! That’s where his regiment landed [something something] Hessians [something something].

Mr. Ben shot me a puzzled look and mouthed, “Regiment?,” as the lawyer began searching through the piles of debris on his floor. At last, he stood up again, triumphant, holding a conical helmet that reminded me of the hat the Pope wears, only bronze.

“I’m sorry,” I said, “just to be clear: Are you a re-enactor?”

“Yup!” he said proudly. “Used to do Civ War, but now I do Rev War. My dad did it too.”

Across the hall, he showed us one of his “Rev War” get ups, which he kept next to an overflowing bookcase full of Confederate history books. I kept scanning them as he spoke, in animated language, about how important free expression was, and how the North, ironically, gets it more than the South does (Southern high schools being a bit touchy about displays of Dixie). Mr. Ben and I did a lot of smiling and nodding, and then we had a nice discussion of pivotal 1st Amendment cases like Tinker and “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” and “I [heart] Boobies.” Finally, it was time to go.

Mr. Ben picked up a “Sons of Confederate Veterans” newsletter on our way out the door, and we made it back to the street before I burst out laughing. I do love my crazy country, I do indeed.

Fame! I’m gonna live forever!

 

 

Glorious actresses graphic via NR

Film Experience emperor Nathaniel R. has shined the “Reader’s Spotlight” on me and I am now famous throughout the land. Behold, my splendor:

“Imagine yourself as supreme empress of the cinema. What would you do?
I would…

  • + Declare a moratorium on anything to do with superheros, vampires, or superhero vampires. (Exceptions may be given for pre-adolescent Swedish vampires and Lisbeth Salander.) Sequels would have to be justified in a five-page paper about what their purpose is beside the making of more money to be spent on more sequels.
  • + Have Pixar lead workshops on Film 101 that are mandatory for any director, writer, or producer whose movies score in the red on Rotten Tomatoes or MetaCritic.
  • + Take away all of Tim Burton’s CGI toys.
  • + Double the budget of Focus Features (and appoint myself to their development department).
    + Bench Michael Bay and divert his money to Amy Pascal to produce several strong, smart, female-driven comedies.”

 

There’s more, including my thoughts on what Tarantino does better than anyone else, “When Harry Met Sally,” and red-headed women. He also asked who’d write the movie of my life (Tamara Jenkins) and who would play me in it (what’s that little girl from Curly Sue doing these days?) though that part of the Q&A didn’t make the cut. Check out what did here. And thanks again, Nathaniel!

How Many Children to Have?: A Scientific Analysis

All right, let’s say you — grown, responsible, possibly partnered, somewhat solvent person — have agreed to have children. (HYPOTHETICALLY.) They’re important to have for various reasons: in case you need a kidney later in life, or a loan, or someone to spring you from jail because they feel obliged to. Your parents can also serve these functions but only for the term of their natural lives.

So! How many, then, should you have? Some people wing it but I think a decision like this should be well-thought-out and based on logic.

A) 1 child

CONS: Only children are brats. Some only children will bristle at this information and tell you it’s not true, but some only children are also known to be liars and also to think rather well of themselves, presumably because they do not have any siblings to keep their egos in check.

PROS: Cheaper! Easier. More portable. Best parent-to-child ratio (2:1)

NOTABLE ONLY CHILDREN: Natalie Portman, Robin Williams, FDR, Frank Sinatra, Alan Greenspan, Chelsea Clinton, Ella Fitzgerald

 

B) 2 children

CONS: If you produce one good kid, you could chalk that up to luck. If you produce two good kids, it’s tempting to become a snooty, self-righteous  prick who thinks they have it all figured out. Also it’s tempting to dress the two kids in matching tennis outfits and have them pose for the cover of the J. Crew catalog.

On the other hand, if one child is good and the other bad, the good child inevitably becomes resentful of all the time & attention lavished on the bad one.

PROS: Having two kids is optimal for your health.  “Too few or none at all, and they are at increased risk of dying from almost all of the conditions studied, perhaps because they lack the extra motivation to look after their health. But too many, and they struggle to cope with the financial and emotional stress of bringing up a large family. Having two children, however, is just right, the journal Social Science & Medicine reports.” — That’s reasoning right out of “Goldilocks and the Three Bears”!

Two girls, specifically, if you can manage it. Harmony! Hair-braiding! “Helping around the house!” (Ew.) But doubling it up doesn’t mean double the fun: for some reason, four girls is poison: “Families with four girls were the least happy, according to the study.” Doesn’t that seem a bit weird? After all, Meg, Jo, Beth, and Amy did all right.

If you do have only girls, though, the father is more likely to leave. It is true that Marmee spent a suspicious amount of time as a single-parent, and Mr. Bennett, God knows, was not happy. Would Tevye have skipped if he were able to? Questions for the ages.

Also, two gives you a bit of an insurance policy in case the first one is rotten and/or refuses to donate that kidney.

NOTABLE PRODUCTS OF TWO CHILDREN FAMILIES: the Wakefield twins*, the Coen brothers, Sasha & Malia Obama

 

C) 3 children

CONS: At this point, it probably helps to have a house, or even, ideally, a bed-and-breakfast.

PROS: A big, happy family! Or, more likely, a realistic view of life. Even if you first two were good, what are the odds the third will be too? If the third indeed is less good, then you’re brought back to earth and can go around with a humbled, penitent smile, apologizing for all the bragging your first children made you do. Then your friends will once again take your calls.

NOTABLE PRODUCTS OF THREE CHILDREN FAMILIES: Ayn Rand (oldest of 3 girls); Bart, Lisa, and Maggie Simpson; Alvin and the Chipmunks; the Chipettes; the kids from “Full House”; me

 

D) More than 3 children

CONS: You’re contributing to global warming.

PROS: Well, you’re definitely hedging your bets.

NOTABLE PRODUCTS OF FOUR CHILDREN FAMILIES: Paris Hilton (oldest of 4)

… FIVE CHILDREN FAMILIES: Elizabeth Bennett

…  SIX CHILDREN FAMILIES: George W. Bush (oldest of 6); Charles Darwin (5th of 6)

…  NINE CHILDREN FAMILIES: JFK (2nd of 9)

 

*OOPS. Eagle-eyed Nomi (herself the oldest of 3) points out that the Wakefield twins had an older brother. We regret the error.